CNN Investigates 'Airbnb's Hidden Camera Problem' (cnn.com) 76
2017 Slashdot headline: "People Keep Finding Hidden Cameras in Their Airbnbs."
Nearly seven years later, CNN launched their own investigation of "Airbnb's hidden camera problem". CNN: "Across North America, police have seized thousands of images from hidden cameras at Airbnb rentals, including people's most intimate moments... It's more than just a few reported cases. And Airbnb knows it's a problem. In this deposition reviewed by CNN, an Airbnb rep said 35,000 customer support tickets about security cameras or recording devices had been documented over a decade. [The deposition estimates "about" 35,000 tickets "within the scope of the security camera and recording devices policy."]
Airbnb told CNN a single complaint can involve multiple tickets.
CNN actually obtained the audio recording of an Airbnb host in Maine admitting to police that he'd photographed a couple having sex using a camera hidden in a clock — and also photographed other couples. And one Airbnb guest told CNN he'd only learned he'd been recorded "because police called him, months later, after another guest found the camera" — with police discovering cameras in every single room in the house, concealed inside smoke detectors. "Part of the challenge is that the technology has gotten so advanced, with these cameras so small that you can't even see them," CNN says.
But even though recording someone without consent is illegal in every state, CNN also found that in this case and others, Airbnb "does not contact law enforcement once hidden cameras are discovered — even if children are involved." Their reporter argues that Airbnb "not only fails to protect its guests — it works to keep complaints out of the courts and away from the public."
They spoke to two Florida attorneys who said trying to sue Airbnb if something goes wrong is extremely difficult — since its Terms of Service require users to assume every risk themselves. "The person going to rent the property agrees that if something happens while they're staying at this accommodation, they're actually prohibited from suing Airbnb," says one of the attorneys. "They must go a different route, which is a binding arbitration." (When CNN asked if this was about controlling publicity, the two lawyers answered "absolutely" and "100%".) And when claims are settled, CNN adds, "Airbnb has required guests to sign confidentiality agreements — which CNN obtained — that keep some details of legal cases private."
Responding to the story, Airbnb seemed to acknowledge guests have been secretly recorded by hosts, by calling such occurrences "exceptionally rare... When we do receive an allegation, we take appropriate, swift action, which can include removing hosts and listings that violate the policy.
"Airbnb's trust and safety policies lead the vacation rental industry..."
Nearly seven years later, CNN launched their own investigation of "Airbnb's hidden camera problem". CNN: "Across North America, police have seized thousands of images from hidden cameras at Airbnb rentals, including people's most intimate moments... It's more than just a few reported cases. And Airbnb knows it's a problem. In this deposition reviewed by CNN, an Airbnb rep said 35,000 customer support tickets about security cameras or recording devices had been documented over a decade. [The deposition estimates "about" 35,000 tickets "within the scope of the security camera and recording devices policy."]
Airbnb told CNN a single complaint can involve multiple tickets.
CNN actually obtained the audio recording of an Airbnb host in Maine admitting to police that he'd photographed a couple having sex using a camera hidden in a clock — and also photographed other couples. And one Airbnb guest told CNN he'd only learned he'd been recorded "because police called him, months later, after another guest found the camera" — with police discovering cameras in every single room in the house, concealed inside smoke detectors. "Part of the challenge is that the technology has gotten so advanced, with these cameras so small that you can't even see them," CNN says.
But even though recording someone without consent is illegal in every state, CNN also found that in this case and others, Airbnb "does not contact law enforcement once hidden cameras are discovered — even if children are involved." Their reporter argues that Airbnb "not only fails to protect its guests — it works to keep complaints out of the courts and away from the public."
They spoke to two Florida attorneys who said trying to sue Airbnb if something goes wrong is extremely difficult — since its Terms of Service require users to assume every risk themselves. "The person going to rent the property agrees that if something happens while they're staying at this accommodation, they're actually prohibited from suing Airbnb," says one of the attorneys. "They must go a different route, which is a binding arbitration." (When CNN asked if this was about controlling publicity, the two lawyers answered "absolutely" and "100%".) And when claims are settled, CNN adds, "Airbnb has required guests to sign confidentiality agreements — which CNN obtained — that keep some details of legal cases private."
Responding to the story, Airbnb seemed to acknowledge guests have been secretly recorded by hosts, by calling such occurrences "exceptionally rare... When we do receive an allegation, we take appropriate, swift action, which can include removing hosts and listings that violate the policy.
"Airbnb's trust and safety policies lead the vacation rental industry..."
Why would you sue Airbnb?! (Score:2, Interesting)
In private it is, yes.
If you're genuinely outraged by illegal activity, then it is the perp, who should be prosecuted — criminally.
Why would you sue the company? Ah, to get money, yes, of course...
Re: (Score:2)
"recording someone without consent is illegal in every state" -- shows how little this person knows about law.
Re:Why would you sue Airbnb?! (Score:5, Interesting)
Why would you sue the company? Ah, to get money, yes, of course...
I think part of the problem is these platforms have become too involved in the whole process. The lines between "listing platform" and "provider" have gotten blurred to the point people are mistaken about what AirBNB really is.
Think of the old days when folks used to shop for a used car from the classified in the local paper. The info's written by the seller, you call them directly on the phone (or email them), you arrange to see it, get a check up, etc. You're dealing with the person. If you got a car from one of those ads no one in their right mind would try to sue the newspaper if it turned out to be a lemon. That's between you and the seller. Or even Craigslist. If I found a "room to rent" from there am I going to hold CL accountable for what's at the home? No. But when you're on AirBNB you're seeing all these listing together in uniform presentation, pricing and terms laid out, you're paying through the app, you make reviews on the app, and raise concerns of the app for their staff. You start to get a notion that AirBNB is vetting these people in some way, and is putting their personal seal-of-approval on them for showing their listings. It's not some random Joe Schmo's place you're renting. You're "getting an AirBNB" -- so yeah, this is AirBNB's thing to be responsible for. That's how they think.
If AirBNB wasn't involved in the processing of payment at all, and you were having to hand cash over to the actual host, I think people would be approaching this whole system differently.
Re: (Score:2)
Or, in the past you tried to get a classified ad in the paper where you wanted to meet someone in a motel for pursuits of an immoral nature for money- the paper tells you "we don't do that sort of thing here." The paper is looking after itself by not allowing it to be associated with shady dealings. AirBnB is the opposite - they dont' care, they got your money, they are purely transactional, so who cares if it makes them have a weird association with peeping toms. If it hurts their business in the long t
Re: (Score:2)
"I'm not a pimp, I just run a listing service for prostitutes and handle the money..." is an argument.
Re: Why would you sue Airbnb?! (Score:2)
...well, yes, and like that argument, if you get too involved you're a pimp after all.
CNN "Investigates" ??? (Score:3, Interesting)
Hard to image CNN actually doing investigation which brings unknown persons to the attention of law enforcement for this violation.
More likely, they googled for news articles on airbnb, arrest, recording, camera, etc. and then cobbled together a short video piece.
An actual investigation would be to physically visit hundreds of airbnb and sweep them for cameras and recording devices.
Re:CNN "Investigates" ??? (Score:4, Informative)
They interviewed multiple victims, lawyers for those victims, gathered data from court depositions, tried to get someone from Airbnb to agree to an interview but they still got some quotes, etc.
But hey, why bother taking the time to look at the linked source when you can just imagine things that reinforce your pre-existing opinions.
Re: (Score:2)
>They interviewed multiple victims, lawyers for those victims, gathered data from court depositions,
They found existing news stories, existing court cases, existing legal actions, etc. and cobbled together a news story.
Where's the part about finding violations that are not already in the legal process or already in the news?
Re: (Score:2)
CNN has been involved in numerous investigations which brought to light issues both national and international.
Ongoing rapes [cnn.com] and sexual assaults [cnn.com] at the Coast Guard, and the cover up [cnn.com] over the years. Congress is [cnn.com] investigating [cnn.com].
Investigation into the murder of Ukrainian POWs [cnn.com] by Russia.
Importation of millions of dirty, used medical gloves [cnn.com] into the U.S.
Delays and oversight [cnn.com] of the Veterans Affairs hospital system. They received a Peabody Award [peabodyawards.com] for their work.
A binder full of classified information on Russia [cnn.com] which
Communists for CNN (Score:2, Informative)
From the actual article:
So, yeah, Trump wanted to declassify it, and it disappeared — so now Communists are accusing Trump of wanting to hide it.
Not the first time they claim the exact opposite of what Trump said or did...
Re: (Score:2)
Dishonest misrepresentation, I guess that's what Trump's Treason Shits are best at. You're the one claiming the exact opposite of what the article shows.
The day before leaving office, Trump issued an order declassifying most of the binder’s contents, setting off a flurry of activity in the final 48 hours of his presidency. Multiple copies of the redacted binder were created inside the White House, with plans to distribute them across Washington to Republicans in Congress and right-wing journalists.
Re: (Score:1)
"Trump's Treason Shits" are those, who accused him of treason, boychik. Not his defenders :-)
"Missing" — or back to CIA, where "Trump's Treason Shits", who have just suppressed the story of Hunter Biden's laptop, remained in full power.
But the Communist's narrative is still contradicted — Trump di
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Can an Internet victory be any more complete? :-)
Re: (Score:3)
Where I live if I use a travel agency to book and something goes wrong I sue the travel agency. They are responsible since that is the service they are providing. Vetting out the destinations and offering safe, reliable accommodations is their responsibility.
Re: (Score:1)
Please explain how AirBNB is supposed to vet the renters.
"Everybody lies" - House MD.
Re: (Score:3)
Make it membership based and only accept new applications on the recommendation of an existing full member.
Re: (Score:2)
Please explain how AirBNB is supposed to vet the renters.
"Everybody lies" - House MD.
The same way real estate agents do, by doing due diligence. They just don't want to, because it would cost them money.
Re: (Score:2)
Please explain how AirBNB is supposed to vet the renters.
"Everybody lies" - House MD.
The same way real estate agents do, by doing due diligence. They just don't want to, because it would cost them money.
It wouldn't cost them a penny - ALL costs would be passed on to you, the customer.
The real problem is that "due diligence" doesn't work in this case - people lie!
Re: (Score:2)
It wouldn't cost them a penny - ALL costs would be passed on to you, the customer.
The real problem is that "due diligence" doesn't work in this case - people lie!
Well, due diligence is about verifying whether people are telling the truth... and yes, that's why it costs money. That's why proper real estate agents charge more than Airbnb, because they are required by law to do their job properly.
Re: (Score:2)
Please explain how AirBNB is supposed to vet the renters.
Preferably, with a screen test and a signed porn release.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think so, why would you think AirBnB would do any rigorous vetting at all, its just airbnb is a bigger target with a bigger wallet. I would be also interested to know if airbnb is any worse than say a normal bnb, 35000 seem like a lot but according to this https://backlinko.com/airbnb-s... [backlinko.com] they booked 193.2 million nights and experience in 2020 if you take each that as a percentage that 0.018% sure a booking maybe more than one night, not every case would have been detected but also those tickets ha
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think so, why would you think AirBnB would do any rigorous vetting at all, its just airbnb is a bigger target with a bigger wallet.
The more layers you put between the consumer and the product, the harder is it for a consumer to distinguish who the real maker is.
People buy a Macbook, an "Apple laptop" --> no, they bought a Foxconn or Pegatron laptop, made according to blueprints supplied by Apple. Apple backs the quality of the product and addresses complaints about it, but they aren't really in control of this. The QC at the factory is run by the contractor (Apple doesn't have personnel on the floor doing the spot checks and supervi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That depends on who you actually have a contract with. I have never used Airbnb, so I'm not sure, but I don't think there is any legal relationship established between the renter and the host, is there? If not, it should be Airbnb who is responsible for the condition of the rental, including hidden cameras. The fact that they put such language about arbitration in their ToC seems to suggest that they agree...
What really should be illegal though is a ToC requiring binding arbitration. Signing away the right
Re: (Score:1)
Why would you sue the company? Ah, to get money, yes, of course...
You should sue the property owner - and at a minimum, be given the property you rented if you win, with the owner to pay all costs.
AirBnB should probably also sue the owner for damaging their reputation.
Re:Why would you sue Airbnb?! (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're genuinely outraged by illegal activity, then it is the perp, who should be prosecuted — criminally.
Yes. And if Airbnb is aware of criminal activity they should report it to the appropriate authorities. Sure sounds like they are protecting the makers of kiddie porn to protect their reputation.
If this is the case they should die in a fire.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's not reach at conclusions.
I'm sure many of them were just installing a system for parents to monitor their children while staying in the airbnb property, and simply forgot the final step of giving the parents access. Anyone who owns a property should be immune to legal assault from no-account plebs!!
Re:Why would you sue Airbnb?! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why would you sue Airbnb?! (Score:4, Interesting)
If you're genuinely outraged by illegal activity, then it is the perp, who should be prosecuted — criminally.
Why would you sue the company? Ah, to get money, yes, of course...
If you go to a restaurant and get hospitalized with food poisoning, are you the suing the waiter, the chef, the farmer who grew the food, the person who invited you for lunch, or the restaurant?
Obviously you are suing (at least primarily) the restaurant. The restaurant is the entity you were financially negotiating with for safe food.
Well, AirBNB is the entity you are financially negotiating with for a safe stay. That's acknowledged in the fact they are the ones who do background checks on the hosts.
In this case AirBNB is even more guilty in that they are specifically aware, per the summary, that they have been providing customers with rentals where they are being secretly intimately recorded. AirBNB is specifically aware of tens of thousands of reported cases and have been aware for many years. They can infer that in actuality there must be many more cases than were reported. They can also infer that the opportunity to conduct voyeurism is a driving incentive for some of these voyeurs to offer rentals on AirBNB. Some percentage of AirBNB's profit is therefore a direct result of providing voyeurs with victims.
*AirBNB* says that that is such a small amount as to be incidental to them conducting a normal legitimate business. But if AirBNB hasn't been acting in reasonable good faith to identify the extent of that abuse and protect their customers, it follows that they may in fact quietly see the revenue driven to them by voyeurs as something to protect.
If that is the case, they should be sued, and in fact, sued into bankruptcy.
Re: (Score:2)
Please tell us how AirBNB is supposed to know everybody's secret inner thoughts?
Re: Your stupid "restaurant" example:
Food poisoning at a restaurant isn't done deliberately. ie. They don't look at women as they come in and think, "She's hot, I think I'll poison her..."
Re: (Score:2)
>"Please tell us how AirBNB is supposed to know everybody's secret inner thoughts?"
They can't. But that doesn't matter. "Inner thoughts" is this context is "intent." Knowing intent is not necessary to hold someone responsible. You might not intend to run over someone in your car, but you can bet you could still be held criminally and/or civilly responsible/accountable.
>"Food poisoning at a restaurant isn't done deliberately. ie. They don't look at women as they come in and think, "She's hot, I thi
Re: (Score:2)
So if you stayed in a Holiday Inn and some unauthorized person affiliated with the company did the same thing you shouldn't sue Holiday Inn?
Re: (Score:2)
Not the same thing at all.
Holiday inn contracts the people who work there. They're employees.
AirBNB doesn't contract anybody, they put people in contact with each other and take a percentage of any money that changes hands.
Re: (Score:2)
>"AirBNB doesn't contract anybody, they put people in contact with each other and take a percentage of any money that changes hands."
And they do this through contracts with the property owners. I believe this might also include background checks as well. The customers have no interaction with the property owners, at all. To them, the entire interaction, communication, and transaction is with AirBNB. As such, some might believe there is some shifted responsibility to AirBNB. It is a somewhat gray are
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe, you should. But I wouldn't mix the "think of the children" outrage into it — as TFA is doing. Illegal activities are subject to criminal prosecution.
The company, that (mis)represented the criminals, may be liable for damages — tort — but it is not guilty of the crime.
Re: (Score:2)
AirBNB encourages owners to install cameras with its policies. AirBNB wants evidence to back up claims, and cameras are the best way to do that.
I'd feel better if it were some other three letter (Score:4, Insightful)
...team investigating - say, the FBI, or the DOJ. My point is, somebody with an email domain ending in .gov, not a bunch of newsies.
Re:I'd feel better if it were some other three let (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I'd feel better if it were some other three let (Score:5, Insightful)
Therein lies the problem. Most of the time, it is the journalists who are the first to know about a problem, and they're the ones to be first to make it public,
Once it's public, its only the anger of the crowd that gets the government to actually start "doing something".
It's why the constitution makes full note of "the press" because they are the invisible fourth branch of government whose purpose is to keep the other 3 in check.
And it's there because the press shouldn't be an arm of the government - it needs to be an independent branch.
You may not like CNN - there are very many good reasons to dislike them - but this is their purpose to bring awareness of the issue to the public. Only once awareness happens can the public get rightfully angry and demand action.
Otherwise you might get action from individual states but not always.
Re: (Score:2)
>"Once it's public, its only the anger of the crowd that gets the government to actually start "doing something".
It doesn't have to be the government (or only government). The market will punish AirBNB, regardless. As this type of news spreads, you can bet consumers will be far less likely to use such services. And that punishment can be very swift and severe. It is absolutely in AirBNB's best interest for THEM to do as much as possible to address such issues. Their competitors will be watching, as
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
We don't know the lost opportunistic cost to AirBNB of the negative PR. They might have already lost many millions in lost sales. I don't really know. I just said it "can" be swift and severe. Look to the Bud Light thing for a very good example of swift and severe reaction/punishment by the market/consumers...
Anyway, I am not sure it has been widely known for as long as "upwards of 7 years. I wouldn't be a good judge of that, since I have no interest in AirBNB and wouldn't have focused on such news.
Re: (Score:2)
The Press is protected by the constitution's protections for the press, but that is not actually the same thing. The constitution is talking about anyone having the freedom to us their devices and systems exemplified by the printing presses of that day and age. The constitution was not calling for the protection of news organizations that we today call The Press. This is a common mistake that people make, and it does often amount to the same thing. However people also tend to then forget that these protecti
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A journalist can go sniffing around, sifting
Do their lawyers know about this? (Score:4, Insightful)
Airbnb "does not contact law enforcement once hidden cameras are discovered — even if children are involved." Their reporter argues that Airbnb "not only fails to protect its guests — it works to keep complaints out of the courts and away from the public."
Just how would this not be considered accessory after the fact?
If a victim reported an incident like this to law enforcement, if they did not pursue it I would suspect they had been bribed.
Re: (Score:2)
AirBNB tries to protect its reputation, that's understandable.
AirBNB isn't responsible for what people do. They're not the criminals, the renters are.
There's literally no way to know what any given renter's secret inner thoughts are. WiFi spy cameras are readily available and can be installed and removed in minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's literally no way to know what any given renter's secret inner thoughts are. WiFi spy cameras are readily available and can be installed and removed in minutes.
To be considered culpable of "accessory after the fact" you do not have to know what anyone's "secret inner thoughts" are. It is a manner of knowing what they did which is well supported by evidence and then helping them escape the consequences of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. But declining to be conscripted into (presumably unpaid) police service is hardly the same thing as actively assisting... well... anyone at anything. The standards, both academic and physical, for police work are quite low, particularly for the compensation they get. So in most cases if someone were inclined to do the job, that could already be on the PD as officers.
And I would also point out that the ACLU, and pretty much any other civil rights organization, will tell you that the first rule of d
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The statement in the summary of "But even though recording someone without consent is illegal in every state" is blatantly FALSE, at least if it doesn't contain audio. If audio is included, then that is different. But making such a generic statement is wrong and irresponsible.
In most States, it is *NOT* illegal for a property owner to put hidden cameras [without audio] in most areas. So there would be no law broken. I personally think having hidden (non-disclosed) cameras is morally "wrong", but that d
Re: (Score:2)
Can you even report a crime you have not witnessed yourself, from another state ?
Re: (Score:2)
>"You're also not a person that can read."
>"Every single one of the hidden cameras that has a police report BOTH recorded audio AND did so in bedrooms and bathrooms."
I commented on the summary, AND WROTE THAT I WAS COMMENTING ON THE SUMMARY. And the summary says:
"But even though recording someone without consent is illegal in every state"
Since you think I can't read, please point out where the quoted statement, which is the first sentence of a NEW PARAGRAPH, is qualified to mean only bedrooms/bathroo
Starting to sound like a cult.. (Score:2)
Cults are very good at hiding the abuse behind their doors.
Why are people tolerating this?
Why are laws allowing this?
Also, what's it like in other countries?
Enjoy the view (Score:2)
I do have a beautiful daughter. Perverts.
Re: (Score:2)
Hahaha, I've never been particularly worried about this as well because anyone who manages to peep on me gets a self inflicted punishment clearly not worth the thrill.
It's wrong, and the renters share the blame (Score:2)
Why the fuck would anybody assume that their visit in an AirBnB comes with privacy? That's just not in line with basic human nature. I guarantee you that the invention of the first door was followed almost instantly by the first peep hole.
I wouldn't wander into a biker bar wearing a shirt that says, "Harley sucks" because I might get my ass beat. And I wouldn't have sex in a share rental unless I was okay being recorded. These things are self-evident, and if I put myself in these places, it's partly my faul
Re: (Score:2)
Why the fuck would anybody assume that their visit in an AirBnB comes with privacy? That's just not in line with basic human nature. I guarantee you that the invention of the first door was followed almost instantly by the first peep hole.
This.
AirBNB is in no way to blame for what other people do.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
People would constantly try to game that system or use it for revenge.
Who could have expected this? (Score:2)
Now I get the name Airbnb (Score:2)
AIR Bare Naked Bimbos
OR: Babes, Butts, Boners, Balls deep, Boinking, Bitches, Bong loads, Boo Foo, Barfing, Begging, Bondage, Banging, Bulldog, B.M.s, Bungee-Jumper, Burp-me, Blue Balls, Blue Pill, Bordello, Banjos, Boy Bands, Bad Dog, Bison, Bisquick, Barbie Doll, Bowling Pin, Bowling Ball, Bada-Bingo, and/or Blumpkins...
Customers are doing it wrong (Score:2)
Customers finding these cameras should be calling the cops, not whining at customer service staff.
Re: (Score:2)
Network Scanner App? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)